Choose a scene and navigate within the first image. One click changes the position on touchscreens. One click on the zoomed-in image opens the original in a new window. The first image shows the scaled photograph of the test device.

Screen Flickering / PWM (Pulse-Width Modulation)

ℹ

To dim the screen, some notebooks will simply cycle the backlight on and off in rapid succession - a method called Pulse Width Modulation (PWM) . This cycling frequency should ideally be undetectable to the human eye. If said frequency is too low, users with sensitive eyes may experience strain or headaches or even notice the flickering altogether.

Screen flickering / PWM not detected

In comparison: 52 % of all tested devices do not use PWM to dim the display. If PWM was detected, an average of 8773 (minimum: 43 - maximum: 142900) Hz was measured.

Display Response Times

ℹ

Display response times show how fast the screen is able to change from one color to the next. Slow response times can lead to afterimages and can cause moving objects to appear blurry (ghosting). Gamers of fast-paced 3D titles should pay special attention to fast response times.

↔ Response Time Black to White

30 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined

↗ 19 ms rise

↘ 11 ms fall

The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.8 (minimum) to 240 (maximum) ms. » 74 % of all devices are better.This means that the measured response time is worse than the average of all tested devices (25.6 ms).

↔ Response Time 50% Grey to 80% Grey

32 ms ... rise ↗ and fall ↘ combined

↗ 14 ms rise

↘ 18 ms fall

The screen shows slow response rates in our tests and will be unsatisfactory for gamers.In comparison, all tested devices range from 0.9 (minimum) to 636 (maximum) ms. » 18 % of all devices are better.This means that the measured response time is better than the average of all tested devices (41 ms).

(±) The average temperature for the upper side under maximal load is 33.7 °C / 93 F, compared to the average of 33.2 °C / 92 F for the devices in the class Smartphone.(+) The maximum temperature on the upper side is 35.9 °C / 97 F, compared to the average of 35.8 °C / 96 F, ranging from 22.4 to 51.7 °C for the class Smartphone.(+) The maximum temperature on the bottom side is 34.8 °C / 95 F, compared to the average of 34.3 °C / 94 F, ranging from 22 to 326 °C for the class Smartphone.(+) In idle usage, the average temperature for the upper side is 29.3 °C / 85 F, compared to the device average of 33.2 °C / 92 F.

HTC U Play audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (88.2 dB)Bass 100 - 315 Hz(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.5% lower than median(±) | linearity of bass is average (9.8% delta to prev. frequency)Mids 400 - 2000 Hz(±) | higher mids - on average 7.1% higher than median(±) | linearity of mids is average (7.4% delta to prev. frequency)Highs 2 - 16 kHz(±) | higher highs - on average 10.2% higher than median(±) | linearity of highs is average (8.1% delta to prev. frequency)Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (29% difference to median)Compared to same class» 75% of all tested devices in this class were better, 7% similar, 18% worse» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%Compared to all devices tested» 85% of all tested devices were better, 4% similar, 11% worse» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%

OnePlus 3T audio analysis

(+) | speakers can play relatively loud (84.35 dB)Bass 100 - 315 Hz(-) | nearly no bass - on average 24.6% lower than median(±) | linearity of bass is average (7.2% delta to prev. frequency)Mids 400 - 2000 Hz(+) | balanced mids - only 4.6% away from median(+) | mids are linear (4.6% delta to prev. frequency)Highs 2 - 16 kHz(±) | higher highs - on average 7.1% higher than median(+) | highs are linear (2.8% delta to prev. frequency)Overall 100 - 16.000 Hz(±) | linearity of overall sound is average (20.5% difference to median)Compared to same class» 13% of all tested devices in this class were better, 10% similar, 77% worse» The best had a delta of 13%, average was 25%, worst was 44%Compared to all devices tested» 44% of all tested devices were better, 9% similar, 47% worse» The best had a delta of 3%, average was 21%, worst was 53%